Flag for Taxon: Subspecies Lomandra longifolia longifolia
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| craig-r | w_martin | Subspecies Lomandra longifolia longifolia |
I don't think L. longifolia has any subspecies |
Aug. 28, 2021 02:51:55 +0000 | craig-r |
Merged ssp. into parent |
Comments
Ok, my internet seems a bit better now and I notice that there is a deviation on iNat for L. l. exilis [1] so this flag can probably be closed. I'll leave the flag open for a few hours though for comment
[1] It seems that L. l. exilis is accepted in Victoria Australia so I assume this is the reason for the deviation from POWO. Is that correct @reiner ?
https://vicflora.rbg.vic.gov.au/flora/taxon/2d29cecb-3dc3-4a6c-a0e6-5bfd268cc550
https://biodiversity.org.au/nsl/services/rest/name/apni/92696/api/apni-format
http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:122893-3
It does seem the state herbarium still has it listed, but I not that page was last updated in 2015.Interestingly it is also listed nationally in APNI, but the ssp does not appear on ALA, which I thought sourced from APNI but its seems APC is not the same and is updated.
https://bie.ala.org.au/species/https://id.biodiversity.org.au/node/apni/2895205#classification
When was exilis synonymized? Perhaps its just the older lists lagging and we should update.
I originally added the subspecies 4 years ago as a request by @robertpergl. @w_martin is also knowledgeable on nomenclature and has one obs under that ssp.
Yeah sure check with POWO & you’re good to go.
We used to use local Taxonomic databases https://www.anbg.gov.au/chah/apc/ some years ago before using the global authority POWO, so these subspecies would have been added back then as Reiner mentioned
I'm not sure when exilis was synonymised @reiner. Maybe it was never accepted except by Victoria, I'm not sure. It was published in Lee, A.T. (17 September 1962), Notes on Lomandra in New South Wales. Contributions from the New South Wales National Herbarium 3(3) but apart from that and the Flora of VIC I can find surprisingly little published about it
@w_martin Thanks Wayne that makes sense
I'm waiting on replies to some emails I sent regarding exilis and a question I asked on the forums and will then make a draft for the changes, unless someone does it in the meantime
@reiner it appears that Alma Lee herself sunk exilis back into L. longifolia in her treatment of Lomandra in the Flora of Australia 1986, after treating it as a subspecies in the 60s. In the first two publications cited below she treated exilis as a subspecies. In the third (Flora of Australia), it's back into L. longifolia. No reason is given in the Flora of Australia, but it seems evident that at some point between 1966 and 1986 something happened. Interesting puzzle.
Lee, A.T. (17 September 1962), Notes on Lomandra in New South Wales. Contributions from the New South Wales National Herbarium 3(3): 155-156
Lee, A.T. (1966), Xanthorrhoeaceae. Contributions from the New South Wales National Herbarium, Flora Series 34: 19, 28-31
Lee, A.T. & Macfarlane, T.D. in George, A.S. (ed.) (1986), Lomandra (Xanthorrhoeaceae). Flora of Australia 46: 121
https://biodiversity.org.au/nsl/services/rest/name/apni/92675/api/apni-format
I'll prepare a draft swap of these taxa later and work out how to deal with the existing deviation when it gets committed (I expect that it'll either update itself or I'll have to manually edit it... no big deal)
Yeah, happy for you to go for it. I wonder why it was treated differently by the Vic herbarium as that's over 30 years.
Draft is here: https://inaturalist.ala.org.au/taxon_changes/97901
If someone could have a quick look at it I'd appreciated it because I've never done a merge before. Looks ok though
Merge looks ok - I don't think I've done a merge before either.
There are actually a few people from the Vic herbarium on here using iNat but I know at least one tries to keep a low profile.
I'm going to commit it then. There's only 14 observations of the subspecies so if there is an uproar it's not hard to manually revert. I don't see why there would be an uproar though based on the literature
Committed. The deviation seems to be gone so will close. Thanks all for the discussion, it was interesting!
that "all ssp added to the database" on members of the Asparagacae (e.g. https://inaturalist.ala.org.au/taxa/83375-Lomandra-longifolia) references the taxon framework for Asparagacae https://inaturalist.ala.org.au/taxa/47599/taxonomy_details which is goes from the family node down to ssp and is marked as 'complete' meaning that all nodes (from family down to ssp) have been added to iNaturalist. Thats why it says "all ssp added to the database". If the taxon framework was from family to species and was marked as complete it would say "all species added to the database" on genera species in the Asparagacae and nothing next to ssp. Hope that helps.
Thanks Scott (@loarie) that explanation makes sense and clears thing up for me. Thank you
There used to be Lomandra longifolia subsp. exilis but this is now considered a synonym of Lomandra longifolia, leaving no subspecies of Lomandra longifolia. If this is the case then Lomandra longifolia subsp. longifolia should be just Lomandra longifolia
Edit: I haven't drafted a swap because my internet is playing up and I can't check the resources properly